How come good Friday is only two days from Easter Sunday?

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

There was a WORK day BETWEEN the two Sabbaths to where the spices were bought AFTER the Sabbath of the Feast (the 15th-Mark 16:1), and then prepared BEFORE the weekly Sabbath (the 17th day of the 1st month-Luke 23:56).

Every single statement of course being full of incorrect and fictitious inconsistencies. As shown repeatedly before. But let me just speak about one of them now.

You make it look so one dimensional, <<the spices were bought AFTER the Sabbath of the Feast>>, in other words, on the day, <<AFTER the Sabbath of the Feast>>, in daylight of the day <<after the Sabbath of the Feast>>. According to you, on Friday day, <<after the Sabbath of the Feast>> on Thursday day.

That is not what is seen in Mark 16:1 as well as what is implied and inferred in Mark 16:1. Two things are seen in Mark 16:1 which you pretend are non-existent in Mark 16:1 but very well know, do exist in Mark 16:1.

The first is, Mark 16:1 says "after the Sabbath" which Mark, had in mind, which Sabbath was the Sabbath in between the day Joseph closed the grave on, which was "the Preparation which is the Fore-Sabbath" Friday without question, and "the day after the Sabbath" on which the three women bought spices. Mark means and speaks of "the day after the Sabbath", "the First Day of the week when they would go and anoint Him", and Friday after the Burial -- which was the weekly Sabbath, simply.
That is the first thing you ignore flat as if it is beneath your worthiness to keep in mind.

The second things is this,
You make it look so one dimensional, <<the spices were bought AFTER the Sabbath of the Feast>>, in other words, on the day, <<AFTER the Sabbath of the Feast>>, in daylight of the day <<after the Sabbath of the Feast>>. According to you, on Friday day, <<after the Sabbath of the Feast>> on Thursday day.
But that is not what is seen in Mark 16:1 nor what is implied or written in Mark 16:1. Because it is not written in Mark 16:1 that it was <<the day after the Sabbath>>, but, it is written that "the Sabbath had gone through" -- had just gone through, which was, not <<a work DAY the spices were bought>>, but was, just after "the Sabbath had gone through" just after sunset in the dusk "on the First Day of the week" in the beginning of "the First Day of the week" its evening. It therefore was early of dark still, "on the First Day of the week", after the Sabbath --"the Sabbath" which before the First Day of the week, "had gone through"; the Sabbath which followed on "the Fore-Sabbath the Preparation, the Friday, before it. In Mark 16:1 "the Sabbath had (just) gone through" and it was after the Sabbath in the early of dark still, or dusk, dusk after sunset on 'Saturday' evening.

This shows the WC theory makes no sense and only creates nonsensicality.

 

[AFrazier]

My contention is that 1st/7th ULB are not called Sabbaths because the "work" of preparation and cooking food was specifically permitted. Otherwise everything else was observed as on a Sabbath. Therefore there was only one The Sabbath in passion week the weekly Sabbath. Here are two excerpts from the Jewish Encyclopedia Passover article. "Sabbath occurs 9 times in this article but neither 1st/7th ULB are called Sabbaths.

PASSOVER (פסח; psh Aramaic, פסחא ; psha hence the Greek Πάσχα).
By: Emil G. Hirsch
The festival commemorates the deliverance of Israel's first-born from the judgment wrought on those of the Egyptians (Ex. xii. 12-13; comp. Ex. xiii. 2, 12 et seq.), and the wondrous liberation of the Hebrews from Egyptian bondage (Ex. xii. 14-17). As such, it is identical with the Mazzot (hmtzth, Ex. xii. 17; hn hmtzyth , Lev. xxiii. 5-6) festival, and was instituted for an everlasting statute (Ex. xii. 14). Lev. xxiii., however, seems to distinguish between Passover, which is set for the fourteenth day of the month, and hn mstzwth (the Festival of Unleavened Bread; ἑορτή τῶν ἀζύμων, Luke xxii. 1; Josephus, "B. J." ii. 1, § 3), appointed for the fifteenth day. The festival occurred in Abib (Ex. xiii. 4; Deut. xvi. 1 et seq., where the New Moon is given as the memorial day of the Exodus), later named Nisan, and lasted seven days, from sunset on the fourteenth day to sunset on the twenty-first day; the first and the seventh days were set aside for holy convocation, no work being permitted on those days except such as was necessary in preparing food (Num. xxviii. 16-25). During the seven days of the festival leaven was not to be found in the habitations of the Hebrews (Ex. xii. 19, xiii. 7). Leaven was not to be eaten under penalty of "excision" ("karet"; Ex. xii. 15, 19-20; xiii. 3; Deut. xvi. 3), and the eating of unleavened bread was commanded (Ex. xii. 15, 18; xiii. 6, 7; xxiii. 15; xxxiv. 18; Lev. xxiii. 6; Num. xxviii. 17). On the second day the omer of new barley was brought to the Temple (Lev. xxiii. 10-16; comp. First-Fruits).
...
According to the Samaritans, the offering can take place only on Mount Gerizim (see Aaron ben Elijah, "Gan 'Eden," Eupatoria, 1866, s.v. "Inyan Pesaḥ"; Geiger, in "Z. D. M. G." xx. 532-545; Ibrahim ibn Jacob, "Das Festgesetz der Samaritaner," ed. Dr. Hanover, Berlin, 1904). The Samaritans consider the Feast of Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread as two distinct festivals. The Sabbath is not suspended by the Pesah offering (ib. p. 24). The custom among the Karaites corresponds to that of the Samaritans (see Judah Hadassi, "Eshkol ha-Kofer," § 202). On the 15th of Nisan, which is the "hag ha-mazzot" ("haj al-fatir"), no manner of work is permitted by the Samaritans, even cooking being prohibited; in this they are stricter than the Karaites, who permit the preparation of food (Aaron ben Elijah, ib. s.v. "Inyan Ḥag ha-Mazzot"). Processions are arranged on Mount Gerizim on this holy day (Petermann, "Reisen im Orient," i. 287; see also "Jour. Bib. Lit.," 1903). The 'Omer day does not fall on the second day (16th of Nisan), but on the Sunday after the Sabbath in the festival week.
PASSOVER - JewishEncyclopedia.com​

Let me say again the thing I have said numerous times. I'm not here to argue interpretation. I'm just telling you how it was done. Josephus and the Talmud both say the count is from the 16th. Therefore, the 15th is being treated as a sabbath in practice, since the count is from the morrow after the sabbath.

Aside from the historically documented practice, I don't really care how anyone wants to interpret "sabbath," "holy convocation," or anything else. The count was from the 16th.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Feast days are sabbaths, and the day prior is the "preparation."

Not all 'feasts', <<are sabbaths>>, what, “the Sabbath of the LORD”!

And not every day prior is a 'preparation', what, "The, Preparation"; what "the Preparation which is the Fore-Sabbath"!

You're not even funny any more.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Let me say again the thing I have said numerous times. I'm not here to argue interpretation. I'm just telling you how it was done. Josephus and the Talmud both say the count is from the 16th. Therefore, the 15th is being treated as a sabbath in practice, since the count is from the morrow after the sabbath.

Aside from the historically documented practice, I don't really care how anyone wants to interpret "sabbath," "holy convocation," or anything else. The count was from the 16th.

Works just fine since the 14th was a Friday, the 15th was a Sabbath as well as ULB and the 16th was a Sunday (the morrow after the Sabbath)...

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Your doctrine has Yeshua dying on Thursday (the prosabbaton/preparation of the Passover), and then AFTER sunset, on the NEXT day after His death (that is the day BEFORE the weekly Sabbath-prosabbaton), they go to Pilate and ask for His body,

The Gospel Record has Jesus died on Thursday, "the Preparation of the Passover". NOT <<the prosabbaton>>. And then after sunset, in the night "when evening had come already" on the day after His death "since it was The Preparation which is (note the Presence!) the Before-Sabbath (or 'Pro-Sabbaton', which is the day before the weekly Sabbath, 'Friday'), he -- Joseph, no one else, not <they>, goes to Pilate and asks for His body.

 

[ImAHebrew]

The NT writings were originally written to benefit/help the 1st Century Christians and so it is irrelevant if the Jews do rebuild the temple in the future. The Old Covenant became obsolete (no longer relevant) when it vanished away in 70 A.D.

Hebrews 8:13
In speaking of a new covenant he treats the first as obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away. rsv


​

Regarding Abraham and calling Him a Hebrew; James states that God first visited the Gentiles to take out of them a people (Abraham was chosen) for His name. Abraham was a Hebrew/Semitic Gentile before he was taken out of the Gentile peoples by God to become the father of God's people who became known as the Israelites and then later as the Jews.

Acts 15:13-20
After they finished speaking, James replied, “Brethren, listen to me. 14 Simeon has related how God first visited the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. 15 And with this the words of the prophets agree, as it is written,
16 ‘After this I will return,
and I will rebuild the dwelling of David, which has fallen;
I will rebuild its ruins,
and I will set it up,
17 that the rest of men may seek the Lord,
and all the Gentiles who are called by my name,
18 says the Lord, who has made these things known from of old.’
19 Therefore my judgment is that we should not trouble those of the Gentiles who turn to God, 20 but should write to them to abstain from the pollutions of idols and from unchastity and from what is strangled and from blood. rsv​

​

Shalom Jan001, thank you for the response. Most feel that the destruction of the temple in 70 ad is when the Old Covenant ended, and all I am saying is that IF the Jews rebuild the temple, will they not follow the Old Covenant in their worship, and if they will then the Old Covenant has not vanished away. But I feel that as long as sinners are sinning, the Old Covenant is still in effect for sinners, and has not vanished away. As long as we still have sinners, the Old Covenant is still in effect.

Concerning Acts 15:14 with James referencing what Peter had related to them, James is speaking about Acts 15:7, where Peter related how by HIS MOUTH the Gospel was preached to the Gentiles, I really doubt that Peter had spoken to Abraham. Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew.

 

[ImAHebrew]

Acts 16:1
Paul went katantaō · de also kai to eis Derbe Derbē and kai to eis Lystra Lystra; and kai there was eimi a certain tis disciple mathētēs there ekei named onoma Timothy Timotheos, the son hyios of a converted pistos Jewish Ioudaios woman gynē, whose father patēr · de was a Greek Hellēn. Mounce
​

Timothy's mother whose nationality was Jewish converted to Christianity before she married her Christian husband whose nationality was Greek and then they conceived Timothy. That is why Timothy was not circumcised. Both his parents were Christians before he was conceived. Christian boys are not circumcised for a religious reason. 1 Corinthians 7:18, Colossians 3:11

Timothy's mother was an Israelite/Jew by nationality and his father was a Gentile/Greek by nationality, but because both of them converted to Christianity, they are Christians and so their nationalities do not matter to any persons who are under the new covenant law of Jesus Christ.

However, the Jews who still practiced Judaism made a huge distinction between Jews and Greeks and so these Jews who still practiced Judaism would not associate with any Gentiles/Greeks unless they were devout converts to Judaism.

Matthew 15:22-28
And behold, a Canaanite (GENTILE) woman from that region came out and cried, “Have mercy on me, O Lord, Son of David; my daughter is severely possessed by a demon.” 23 But he did not answer her a word. And his disciples came and begged him, saying, “Send her away, for she is crying after us.” 24 He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” 25 But she came and knelt before him, saying, “Lord, help me.” 26 And he answered, “It is not fair to take the children’s bread and throw it to the dogs.” 27 She said, “Yes, Lord, yet even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters’ table.” 28 Then Jesus answered her, “O woman, great is your faith! Be it done for you as you desire.” And her daughter was healed instantly. rsv
​

The Jew named Jesus equates the Gentiles to dogs.

However, after Jesus' new covenant was meditated by His death on the cross, His kingdom was open for all peoples from all nations.

Matthew 28:18-20
And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age.” rsv​

Galatians 3:28
Now there is neither Jew nor Greek, neither slave nor free, neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
​

As for the Gentile Titus, it seems that he became a Christian during Paul's mission to the Gentiles. The problem was that some false brethren (Jews who had become Christians) had come down from Judea to Antioch and they had started preaching to the Gentiles that the Gentiles had to become Jews before they could be saved. These false brethren were troublesome for Paul's and Barnabas' ministry to the Gentiles. Acts 14:24-28 through Acts 15:1-5

Galatians 2:2-4
I went up by revelation (to Jerusalem ; and I laid before them (but privately before those who were of repute) the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, lest somehow I should be running or had run in vain. 3 But even Titus, who was with me, was not compelled to be circumcised, though he was a Greek. 4 But because of false brethren secretly brought in, who slipped in to spy out our freedom which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage— 5 to them we did not yield submission even for a moment, that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you. rsv​

Shalom Jan001, thank you again for responding. So then there should not have been any difference between Timothy and Titus. If one would be circumcised, then the other should have also, or if one did not get circumcised, then the other should not have been circumcised. You don't think Paul wanted Titus to accompany him the way he wanted Timothy to? Logically, the only difference between Timothy and Titus is the fact that Timothy would have been considered a Jew by birth, and Titus would have been considered a Gentile by birth, and Paul believed that Jews were to be circumcised, and Gentiles weren't (they had freedom). Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

to Pilate and ask for His body, and Pilate is "amazed" that He was already dead (Mark 15:44). Then, in Mark 15:46, the day after He died (according to your timeline), they take Him down from the Cross, and then all night, and all the next day, they wrap Him in linens so that at 3 in the afternoon, the day AFTER He died-almost 24 hours, you have Him being "enclosed" in the tomb by the stone being rolled over the entranced.

Joseph asks for His body.
Then, in Mark 15:46, "He, Joseph, took him down -- laid him down prostrate". NOT <<they take Him down from the Cross>>! And then the rest of the night, and the next morning. NOT, <<and then all night, and all the next day, they wrap Him in linens>>! It is all YOU! in your mind! nothing of this is <<in Mark 15:46>> You are trying to but are not succeeding to be ridiculous.

They buried Him "as it is the Custom of Law of the Scriptures TO BURY", THE PASSOVER, <<so that at 3 in the afternoon, the day AFTER He died>>- not <almost>, but exactly <<24 hours>>, (they, not I) had <<Him being "enclosed" in the tomb by the stone being rolled over the entrance>>. Ja! According to God's <timeline> of the Passover of Yahweh. Halleluiah!

 

[ImAHebrew]

P-e-l-e-a-s-e?! not so! On consecutive days!

BURIAL day on the feast or first day of ULB (the 15th) !
RESURRECTION day on the day after, only sometimes on the Sabbath OF THE LORD; usually not!
"THREE days thick darkness" despite, GOD rules ALL. No sun no moon no stars ruling days or days or nights, or months or seasons or years, but Jesus CHRIST! CHRIST THE ROCK, CHRIST THE CLOUD, CHRIST THE LIGHT ---and Christ the Dark, the JUDGE, the Destruction and the Destroyer of the destroyers of the earth.
"THREE DAYS" the God-given and therefore eschatological imperative WHOLE AND WHOLENESS of the "three days and three nights" of the "THEE DAYS", "on the third day" of, "Christ according to the SCRIPTURES, ROSE!"
Rose: First-Sheaf-Waved, First-Sheaf-Revealed, First-Sheaf-before-the-LORD, First-Sheaf-Shaken, as shook heaven and earth "when there came a great earthquake", "when God EXALTED and SEATED and RESTED Him UP at the Right Hand of God : IN HEAVENLY MAJESTY!"

Shalom Gerhard, I'm sorry, I just see so many different explanations. You seem to say at times that the counting starts on the 16th, and also that the counting starts on the morrow after the weekly Sabbath. Maybe you should clear this up for me. What day did the counting start on? Saturday or Sunday? Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew.

 

[ImAHebrew]

My position is that the "high day" was on the "sabbath," and not a "high sabbath." If the 16th, which was first fruits and the waving of the sheaf in first century practice, fell on the sabbath, then that sabbath would be a high day.

All this debating over something that was how it was is what's creating this unnecessary confusion. How someone chooses to interpret when or how the count should start is irrelevant to how it was counted historically. They counted from the 16th in Jesus' day. That's a fact of history. I've provided documentation to substantiate this practice. No one holding a contrary point of view can do the same.

Shalom AFraizer, debating this topic has been going on for millenia. Here is a quote from Judaism 101:

The Tzedukim (Sadducees) rejected the idea of an oral Torah and believed that the word "Shabbat" in Lev. 23:15 referred to the Shabbat of the week when Pesach began, so counting would always begin on a Saturday night during Passover. The Sadducees no longer exist; today, only a small sect call the Karaites follow this view.

Many years ago we had the privilege to be taught by a young man who had been a direct student of the Rebbe (Menachen Schneerson), and we brought up this issue about which Sabbath to count from. He had not considered Joshua 5 before, and said it didn't matter, because Moses taught Joshua, Joshua taught those who followed him and so on down the line through the Oral Law, so it had to be the Sabbath of the Feast (the 15th) that the counting starts on the morrow of, since that is what the Oral Law (tradition teaches). Well, as you can see, the Sadducees disagreed, and Yeshua even disagreed with certain traditions that were passed down through the Oral Law. So I am just telling you here AFrazier, that just because they had a tradition, it doesn't mean it was correct.

Just review this one more time with me. If we do try to claim that the Sabbath of ULB (15th) fell Wednesday sunset to Thursday sunset, the argument that will be used against us is that John said in John 19:31, that Sabbath was a "High Day." They would argue that for "that Sabbath" to be considered a "High Day" then both the High Day (15th) and the Sabbath (7th day of week) fell together. They will say that is what made it a "megas" day (High Day). Well, if that is the case, then with John 7:37 the same argument must be made, the Last day of the Feast of Tabernacles, THAT "megas" day, must have also fallen on the weekly Sabbath. But if you really read what John is saying there in John 7:37, the emphasis is upon the fact that it was the Last day of the Feast of Tabernacles, THE MEGAS DAY, nothing about the weekly Sabbath here. So in John's mind, the Feast Days that required a solemn assembly and no servile work, were "megas" days, and if that is the case, then in John 19:31, John tells us that Sabbath day was a "megas" day. Please, look at the context of John 19:31. The Jews, since it was preparation, did not want the bodies to remain on the cross on the Sabbath. IF the Sabbath that the Jews were preparing for was the weekly Sabbath, and it was Friday, why even bring up the fact that it was a High Day (megas) day? Do you see the point? It makes no sense to even bring up about the "megas" day being a Sabbath, IF it was Friday and the weekly Sabbath was starting. You could almost argue that on just the weekly Sabbath, the bodies could remain, but if the weekly Sabbath was ALSO a "megas" Sabbath day, then they had to be removed?? Just read John 19:31 again trying to ascertain why John would even bring up about the "megas" Sabbath day IF it was truly the weekly Sabbath that was coming up.

John 19:31 The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and [that] they might be taken away.

Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew.

 

[AFrazier]

Works just fine since the 14th was a Friday, the 15th was a Sabbath as well as ULB and the 16th was a Sunday (the morrow after the Sabbath)...

And "the first day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed" is what date again? Cause that date is the afternoon preceding the last supper, when two of the disciples made ready the passover. It was also the date of the day before the crucifixion.

This is the third or fourth time I've brought it to your attention. Believe as you choose according to your interpretation or tradition, but at least acknowledge the scriptures. We can then at least be on the same page, that you know what the scriptures say, acknowledge them, but choose an alternate interpretation regardless.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

[Staff edit].

The day the Passover must be killed is the 14th. The first day of ULB is the 15th. Not the same day...

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

John 19:31 "The Jews then, because it was, the Preparation ("already"Mk15:42), that the bodies should not remain, upon the cross (where they still were hanging) on the sabbath day...because it was ongoing already..., since the day was great 'of That-sabbath-Of'(-The-Passover-BONE-Day), besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and [that] they might be taken away."
“His body shall not remain ALL NIGHT upon the tree!”

 

[ImAHebrew]

Because THAT weekly Sabbath was also a high day...the 15th.

Shalom Yeshua HaDerekh, and was the LAST, High Day of the Feast of Tabernacles ALSO a weekly Sabbath? (John 7:37) Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew.

 

[ImAHebrew]

And "the first day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed" is what date again? Cause that date is the afternoon preceding the last supper, when two of the disciples made ready the passover. It was also the date of the day before the crucifixion.

How does your explanation fit within this?

Shalom AFrazier, I must say, of all of the opponents I have had on this forum, you are the most formidable. Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Shalom Yeshua HaDerekh, and was the LAST, High Day of the Feast of Tabernacles ALSO a weekly Sabbath? (John 7:37) Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew.

I am saying that it was during the time between when Yeshua was crucified and when He rose. Has nothing to do with Booths...

 

[ImAHebrew]

I am saying that it was when Yeshua was crucified. Has nothing to do with Booths...

Shalom Yeshua HaDerekh, well, when John speaks of a "megas" day in John 19:31, do you not want to say that is BECAUSE the 1st Day of Unleavened Bread FELL on the weekly Sabbath? Well, then when John speaks of another "megas" day with the Last Day of the Feast of Tabernacles (John 7:37), surely you must feel that this "megas" day was also falling on the weekly Sabbath for John to consider it a "megas" day???? Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Shalom Yeshua HaDerekh, well, when John speaks of a "megas" day in John 19:31, do you not want to say that is BECAUSE the 1st Day of Unleavened Bread FELL on the weekly Sabbath? Well, then when John speaks of another "megas" day with the Last Day of the Feast of Tabernacles (John 7:37), surely you must feel that this "megas" day was also falling on the weekly Sabbath for John to consider it a "megas" day???? Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew.

He does not say that it was a Sabbath, just that it was a high day of the Feast. He DOES say that the high day WAS a weekly Sabbath Day when Yeshua was in the tomb.

 

[ImAHebrew]

I am saying that it was during the time between when Yeshua was crucified and when He rose. Has nothing to do with Booths...

Shalom Yeshua HaDerekh, I realize that His crucifixion was not at the time of John 7:37. But John 7:37 speaks of a "megas" day. It was a High Day, the Last day of the Feast of Tabernacles, and it was a "megas" day ALL BY ITSELF. It didn't need a weekly Sabbath for it to be a "megas" day, as you contend the 1st Day of Unleavened Bread needed. In John 19:31, the High Day (megas day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread) was a Sabbath, ALL BY ITSELF, it did NOT need to fall on the weekly Sabbath for it to be a "megas" day Sabbath. Do you not agree? Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew.

 

[ImAHebrew]

[Staff edit].

Shalom Gerhard, why did John mention that the tomb was "nigh at hand?" (John 19:42) Was that even necessary? What was the purpose of him pointing out the tomb was "nearby?" Your assumptions concerning it taking 24 hours before the tomb was sealed, is preposterous, with considering that the tomb was "nigh at hand." Blessings in The Name, ImAHebrew